test: randomize perturbed files excluding ldb #29182

pull L0laL33tz wants to merge 1 commits into bitcoin:master from L0laL33tz:fix_feature_init changing 1 files +10 −4

L0laL33tz commented at 5:44 PM on January 4, 2024: contributor

As discussed in #28831 the ldb files are too small to be randomized for pertubation. This PR excludes ldb files from randomization. Blockfiles are randomly perturbed, ldb file pertubation remains deterministic. For additional rationale see #28612
DrahtBot commented at 5:44 PM on January 4, 2024: contributor


The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.



Code Coverage

For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.



Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process. A summary of reviews will appear here.



Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:
- #29034 (test: detect OS in functional tests consistently using platform.system() by theStack)
If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.
DrahtBot added the label Tests on Jan 4, 2024
DrahtBot added the label CI failed on Jan 4, 2024
test: randomize perturbed files excluding ldb 965c8cdde7

in test/functional/feature_init.py:146 in 3354e077b9 outdated

 145 | +                    # are too small in size for randomization.
 146 | +                    if str(target_file).endswith(".ldb"):
 147 | +                        tf.seek(150)
 148 | +                        tf.write(b"1" * 200)
 149 | +                    else:
 150 | +                        tf.seek(randint(150, 15000))

maflcko commented at 12:06 PM on January 5, 2024:

are block files guaranteed to contain this many bytes of blocks, always?

L0laL33tz commented at 7:37 PM on January 6, 2024:

I tested this the same way @fjahr tested the size of the ldb files in #28831 with

                self.log.info(f"Perturbing file to ensure failure {target_file}, size: {os.path.getsize(target_file)}")

The tested blockfile should always have 16777216 bytes

maflcko commented at 12:07 PM on January 5, 2024: member

Please keep your fixup commits squashed according to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#squashing-commits
L0laL33tz force-pushed on Jan 5, 2024
DrahtBot removed the label CI failed on Jan 5, 2024
kevkevinpal commented at 4:14 PM on January 6, 2024: contributor

I tested this by creating a loop similar to how @maflcko found an issue in #28831

I also noticed that in this test we only perturbed one blk?????.dat file which is blk00000.dat Should we add another .dat file to test this on?
DrahtBot added the label Needs rebase on Jan 11, 2024
DrahtBot commented at 6:10 PM on January 11, 2024: contributor



🐙 This pull request conflicts with the target branch and needs rebase.
DrahtBot commented at 12:58 AM on April 9, 2024: contributor


⌛ There hasn't been much activity lately and the patch still needs rebase. What is the status here?
- Is it still relevant? ➡️ Please solve the conflicts to make it ready for review and to ensure the CI passes.
- Is it no longer relevant? ➡️ Please close.
- Did the author lose interest or time to work on this? ➡️ Please close it and mark it 'Up for grabs' with the label, so that it can be picked up in the future.
maflcko commented at 5:33 AM on April 9, 2024: member

Closing for now, but feel free to open a new pull request, with the changes rebased.
maflcko closed this on Apr 9, 2024
bitcoin locked this on Apr 9, 2025

Contributors

Labels

Linked (view graph)

#28612 Test: followups to #27823 #28831 test: Avoid intermittent failures in feature_init

test: randomize perturbed files excluding ldb #29182

Code Coverage

Reviews

Conflicts